The Proposal to Fixing the Platinum Trophy: The Ribbon System

[Helyx]

There should be a way to associate a ribbon (perhaps a new style) for 100% games without platinums.

 

If the consensus is 75% for the Effort/Participation, then there needs to be a sub 5% (perhaps lower? 1%?) for the super duper ultra mega e-peen plats.

 

Also, is there a soft rollout for this feature? I wouldn't mind testing a WiP version just to see what it looks like on my own profile.

Edited June 12, 2019 by dj_helyx

[Ragowit]

I just want to chip-in my vote that I don't like this feature. As already said by many others in this thread, there are a lot of other features that are currently in the works that should be completed first, and after that lots of other frequently requested features that should be implemented instead of this.

 

I personally actually use the https://psnprofiles.com/leaderboard/rarity from time to time, and I don't even know the numbers behind it. I would also love a "no stacking" leaderboard that simply "merges" all the stacking trophy lists into one so those games only gets counted once.

[freddie1989]

As someone that thinks stacking of platinums is cheap, nasty and downright pointless I think this idea is superb!!

 

I went with a higher % as my vote because certain games, Telltale for instance are straightforward but do take time so effort is required. Given that is the basis for the idea it makes sense for me.

[pinkrobot_pb]

6 hours ago, dj_helyx said:

There should be a way to associate a ribbon (perhaps a new style) for 100% games without platinums.

I have added that to my sig script yesterday.

 

But while doing that I realized it's a bit pointless. Because this new feature is obviously intended to downgrade the easy plat games a bit. And the thing is: people often say how those games should probably just be a 100% without a plat at all. I am one of those people: I feel that it would be more fitting for those games to not have a platinum. So to then still distinguish the games that 'play nice' as good vs bad based on their completion percentages would be a bit harsh in my opinion.

 

But if it's just because more ribbons means more awesomeness, well, I have that now

Edited June 12, 2019 by pinkrobot_pb

[NaseemJohn]

How dare you reward those who put actual effort into the games they play ?

[scemopagliaccioh]

Haha, the Rata games have become quite a burden in the community for this to happen.

Fair enough, I like the idea, maybe it will be what motivates me moving my ass and finally plat stuff like gta, dbzfighters, dmc4 and so on.

[TurtlePM]

I’m starting to think that most people against this feature are those that don’t have any “problem” collecting EZPZ platinums (some kind of pride), yet they have a full mouth arguing about how disgusting, discriminating this is. Why are you offended? And why the first thing to relate this is “to track OTHER PEOPLE profile” instead “it’s for personal track of what rare and easy platinums I have”? I guess I haven’t found anyone here talking about their profile, always pointing the negative side of other’s platinum collection.

 

If I want to check if one person has EZPZ platinums, I just click on their profile and that’s it. They’re not discrete at all, all those platinums are all stacks one after another  I wouldn’t need a ribbon on top of their profile to “spoil” me anything.

 

Off-topic: somehow to track or order games by Base + DLC (100%) would be nicer (like Rocket League or LittleBIGPlanet).

Edited June 13, 2019 by TurtlePM

[Helyx]

1 hour ago, TurtlePM said:

I’m starting to think that most people against this feature are those that don’t have any “problem” collecting EZPZ platinums (some kind of pride), yet they have a full mouth arguing about how disgusting, discriminating this is

 

At this point, nobody should be surprised that there should be some form of rarity AND completionist leaderboards. It's all fine and dandy to have an overall points leaderboard, but there's some seriously hardcore gamers out there who put up tons of UR trophies and have obscenely high completions.

 

This move isn't meant to shame the top trophy earners, but instead pay respects to the other class of gamers that frequent the site. Instead of seeing it as a slight against the top elitists, we should use the opportunity to highlight the rest of the community who are achieving equally impressive feats in their own right.

 

Is this ribbon system the answer? Maybe...maybe not. It's certainly a step in the right direction to pay respect to all varieties of gamers on the forum.

 

[F]

[Meeryn]

Generally speaking, I don't think this is a bad idea.  You want to prune games designed to sell by padding trophy collections.  Hey, fair game.  But your current implementation has several, serious issues.

 

Puzzle-oriented games don't fit into this system.  The intended difficulty of any puzzle can be bypassed by using a guide as the challenge presented isn't in the gameplay.  Even difficult puzzle games can be crushed in a mere fraction of the intended playtime by following a guide.  I personally enjoy puzzles and will put in the effort to get as far as possible before referring to a guide; Ether One took me about a week to complete, but with a guide, can be blitzed in two hours.  How will you distinguish between trophy hunters who just follow a guide to nab a quick and easy platinum from legitimate players?  A time gate?  How are you going to figure out the cutoff point?  And then what's to keep a trophy hunter from just letting the game sit afk overnight, then polishing off the platinum in the morning?  They already don't care about the game, so why would they care to honour your ribbon system?

 

Narrative and avant-garde games fall into a very similar situation, one that you even kinda sorta, really vaguely identify.  Games like The Wolf Among Us are not crap, throwaway games made solely to capitalize on trophy hunters.  They are legitimate games with a lot of heart, but due to their structure, are just really easy to complete.  I mean, hell, you're intended to complete those games; the devs want you to see the story to the end.  Right now, it just so happens The Wolf Among Us breaks north of your cutoff, but that could very easily change.  Again, how are you going to separate trophy hunters cruising through the game, not participating in any of the story from players who are legitimately getting involved?

 

As a super niche, very personal example, I am very proud of my Guardian Lord platinum from playing Destiny.  The final trophy, Flawless Raider, requires you to complete an entire six-man raid without a single death.  To pull this off, I spent a week training to solo run The Dark Below.  All the research, all the practice; I sank 25+ hours into this endeavour.  At the time, less than < 2% of players had this trophy amongst people who even look at their trophies.  Thing is, Destiny is essentially a MMORPG: power levels go up, power creep sets in.  Four years later, players could easily go into early raids with massively overpowered gear and just crush the raid into dust, and Flawless Raider went from a < 2% trophy to an 8% trophy.  If you were to implement a super primo "ribbon of rarity," I'd want my week of effort to be rewarded, but Flawless Raider is now just "very rare" because it was made obsolete.

 

Another personal example?  Medal of Honour: Warfighter.  Right now, the platinum for this game sits at a super low 1.58% / 0.3% achievement rate.  Thing is, this platinum isn't actually that hard, it just happens that all the multiplayer trophies are glitched to shit, and will fail to unlock properly.  I deserve the platinum for this game, but I got screwed.  This is a game that would qualify for your super primo "ribbon of rarity" only due to a technicality stemming from bad coding.

 

How are you going to handle these fringe cases?

 

Essentially, what I'm saying is that this system can't really be automated, especially not via an arbitrary cutoff.  If you do this, you need to hand curate ( which, tbh, is entirely possible ).

Edited June 13, 2019 by Meeryn

[willmill97]

I’d rather see the backlog manager feature implemented if I’m perfectly honest!

[The_Raltos]

I really like this idea. This way acquiring a platinum trophy would be more meaningful and getting rare platinums would be even more interesting, plus the players would feel more rewarded by achieving the rarest trophies.

[BigTigzz]

It's a good idea. Trophies have always, in a way, been quite elitist. Isn't that why there's rankings and leaderboards? 

To those against it I would ask why? If it shouldn't matter what games people have played then it shouldn't matter if an extra feature/filter is added. 

If people go onto your profile and see 500 plats and only 10 ribbons and don't like that, then it shouldn't matter to you because presumably you're still doing what you enjoy. 

 

What's key here is nothing is being taken away, it's just a new feature being added. Everything else from your games, to your trophies, to your place on the rankings, won't change. So I fail to see the downside here. 

[freddie1989]

17 minutes ago, BigTigzz said:

What's key here is nothing is being taken away, it's just a new feature being added. Everything else from your games, to your trophies, to your place on the rankings, won't change. So I fail to see the downside here. 

 

Exactly, why wouldn't people love new features!!

[TheYuriG]

7 hours ago, TurtlePM said:

I’m starting to think that most people against this feature are those that don’t have any “problem” collecting EZPZ platinums (some kind of pride), yet they have a full mouth arguing about how disgusting, discriminating this is. Why are you offended? And why the first thing to relate this is “to track OTHER PEOPLE profile” instead “it’s for personal track of what rare and easy platinums I have”? I guess I haven’t found anyone here talking about their profile, always pointing the negative side of other’s platinum collection.

I was one of the ones against the original version of this idea. Initially, it was purely going to point out what are the EZPZ plats the person had, but then it got changed. I'm not against the current iteration, since this is actually a statistic that I'm also interested in seeing. What worried me about the previous version is how it could be used to shame people playing easier games for whatever reason (fun, leaderboards, chill, etc).

 

I'm not a supporter of criticizing what other people play because everyone has different priorities and frowning upon what other people see as fun can only separate the community between the EZPZ supporters and the EZPZ haters. We are all trophy hunters, we shouldn't be separated based on our gaming choices. Some people are trash in games and they still wanna feel like they can achieve something and those games provide that.

 

I honestly believe that people don't hate ezpz games, they actually hate that ezpz games are the best way to climb the leaderboards since there is only one. The moment where you can get rewarded better for playing harder games, I'm pretty sure that most of the EZPZ hate will just simply vanish. Of course there will be those people who are bad at gaming and can't do hard games to climb other leaderboards, but honestly that's their own fault imo. We can't just have billion of leaderboards that will count all trophies for a single person while not counting the ones from another just because "this is my personal standart for competing and you all should follow it because I want" reasons.

[X_Wizi_X]

I like it  

[jayboo1991]

Next step will be rarity leaderboards, where you can filter trophys by rarity grades and create leaderboards out of it ✌

[djb5f]

Time to implement this (and the backlog manager)!

[FawltyPowers]

Shouldn't rarity leaderboards just be scored off the rarity of each trophy? For every trophy take the trophy percentage away from 1 and then total them up.

 

For example:

• A trophy with a rarity of 35% scores 0.65 points (1 - 0.35)
• An Ultra Rare trophy of 4% would score 0.96 points (1 - 0.4)
• A Common trophy of 95% would only score 0.5 points (1 - 0.95)

 

Comparison scores for 2 games on either side of the rarity spectrum:

 

Super Meat Boy

Ultra Rare - 20

Very Rare - 2

Rare - 0

Uncommon - 1

Common - 1

 

Score - 22.54 points

 

Super Destronaut DX

Ultra Rare - 0

Very Rare - 0

Rare - 0

Uncommon - 0

Common - 14

 

Score - 0.08 points

 

• The colour of the trophy doesn't matter, just the rarity.
• No complex formula, just going by the rarity already provided.
• No division of giving points based off the category, for example 25 points for Ultra Rare, 20 points for Very Rare (4.99% = 25 points, 5.00% = 20 points).

 

I know that some games will score higher than others because of the number of trophies but at least the EZPZ games with 75% or greater platinums would hold virtually no value.

[FFHannibal]

I wouldn't put the ribbon of effort lower than 75%.

 

Effort is subjective, just because a plat isn't rare doesn't mean there's no effort involved. There's still the ribbon of rarity after all and if the real intention here is to filter out the 10 sec/min plats then putting the limit at 75% is more than enough (even 90% would do probably) . 

[ahmedelebiary]

It seems that some people think this is just about themselves. No , these features will be mainly implemented to show how much a person has put time and effort into a game to earn a well deserved ultra rare plat. It is to show appreciation of many many underrated profiles that don't appear high on leaderboards just because they don't stack ezpz ratalaika games because they don't care about leaderboards as much as they do about having a good-looking respectable profile and most importantly, playing games they actually enjoy; not force  themselves to play poor 15 mins 'games ' just to climb the leaderboards and show off their +200 plats . I mean I can take someone showing off his 10 UR plats rather than someone with 100 of those "games". They are all just numbers at the end of the day and I think most people that I have met support quality over quantity. So yeah like a previous comment said, this has more positives than the so called negatives of people who are against it, because we all know why would someone hate such a brilliant idea. Good luck making it happen @BlindMango .

[Helyx]

40 minutes ago, FFHannibal said:

I wouldn't put the ribbon of effort lower than 75%.

 

Effort is subjective, just because a plat isn't rare doesn't mean there's no effort involved. There's still the ribbon of rarity after all and if the real intention here is to filter out the 10 sec/min plats then putting the limit at 75% is more than enough (even 90% would do probably) . 

 

At 75%, it's no longer "effort", but "participation". Depending on how low the standard is set for rewarding the player, the name and overall feeling of accomplishment should be directly reflected in the ribbon itself.

 

This new concept is intended to praise rarity, not celebrate mediocrity. I feel anything higher than 60% is a slight against the entire idea of a rarity leaderboard. If 75% is used as the cut-off, then the system will only shame easy platinums. I personally think it should be lower than 50%, but that'd alienate too many member of the community and we'd just end up with thousands feeling like they're being victimized.

 

Bottom line is, this entire project is being used as an alternative to the total points leaderboard, not so that everyone can get a banana sticker as a participation award. If that's what it boils down to, then what's the point?

[Dayleno]

I love this idea and look forward to seeing it implemented! I agree with the points made in the original post about the 'at a glance' statistic. Easy and quick platinums have ruined some meaning behind trophy cards. It has really become an inflated, quantity over quality thing for trophies and I think this idea is a good way to balance quality and quantity again. 

[Helmet_time]

It is an interesting idea.  Looking at my own profile I notice that a lot of pathetically easy, can't miss, zero effort platinums (e.g. Full Throttle, Murdered: Soul Suspect) are below 75%.  So, I'm not sure how much "effort" this would actually represent.  

 

The rarity ribbon is actually more interesting.  Because, let's face it: Ultra Rare Platinums are always a great flex.

[djb5f]

Like any feature, if you don’t like it, ignore it. I don’t use every feature on this site either.

 

This seems to be desired by the majority of the community.  I think it would be a great addition.

[Rally-Vincent---]

3 hours ago, ahmedelebiary said:

It seems that some people think this is just about themselves. No , these features will be mainly implemented to show how much a person has put time and effort into a game to earn a well deserved ultra rare plat. It is to show appreciation of many many underrated profiles that don't appear high on leaderboards just because they don't stack ezpz ratalaika games because they don't care about leaderboards as much as they do about having a good-looking respectable profile and most importantly, playing games they actually enjoy; not force  themselves to play poor 15 mins 'games ' just to climb the leaderboards and show off their +200 plats . I mean I can take someone showing off his 10 UR plats rather than someone with 100 of those "games". They are all just numbers at the end of the day and I think most people that I have met support quality over quantity. So yeah like a previous comment said, this has more positives than the so called negatives of people who are against it, because we all know why would someone hate such a brilliant idea. Good luck making it happen @BlindMango .

 

You know anyone can filter people's trophy logs by "type: platinum" and "rarity: (ultra rare)", right?